Advanced Search
1936 - Imperial Japanese Navy - Battleships and Destroyers
Cottages dotting shore of fishing village. Cottage and manicured landscaping of Prince Saionji Kinmochi. Battleships and destroyers sailing in harbor. Prince standing in parlor, looking out window.
1930s - Japan Readies for War - Public Decree, Discussions
Adult Japanese men reading posted decree. Japanese diplomat talking with Japanese military officer outside; men talking, smoking in BG, one being possible German officer.
1930s - French Political Riots of February 6, 1934 - WWI Veterans
Panning view of the midriffs of WWI veterans, with arms linked; some displaying war medals on their overcoats. Adult Caucasian male recipients of the Croix de Feu marching through streets of Paris.
1950s - Airplane Crash Aftermath - Strewn Debris
Two trucks loaded with debris; adult Caucasian men stand around debris, one on top. Airplane debris on ground; tree stump. Tilt down from top of building; scorched car, debris on ground.
1951 - Earthquake in El Salvador - Destroyed Town
Aerial POV of El Salvador from airplane. Two adult male Salvadoran Army soldiers standing near, pointing to clock tower (4:55pm). Panning view of damage, banner over street: "Ustedes Los Ricos".
1950s - Tornado Aftermath - Destroyed Town
Panning view of adult Caucasian women amidst the rubble in the aftermath of a tornado. Partially downed telephone and power lines and damaged houses.
1930s - Coal Mining on a Budget aka "Steal This Coal Mine" - Coal Chute
Crude wooden scaffolding and chute where adult Caucasian man directs coal into truck flatbed, parked at ground level; Caucasian male children watch, dog in FG.
1940s- Police Chase Through Industrial Strip - Staged Police Chase
Sedan speeding through industrial area; silos, storage tanks in BG. Speeding sedan is followed by police car; siren wailing.
1930s - Snow Festival - Winter Activities
People riding on winter-themed floats; one float has big smiley face. Caucasian male children racing on ice skates. Men ice skating, pushing children in wheel barrows on ice, steering toward camera.
1950s - IBM Office Filing Machine - Sorting Punch Cards
IBM working, distributing/sorting punch cards to specific slots.
1960s - Clown Sticks Tongue Out at Camera - Man Dressed as Clown
Adult Caucasian man, dressed as a clown wearing big ears, glasses, and pointy nose with a little umbrella on it, and a hat, turns around and sticks his tongue out at the camera; shot freezes.
1940s - Western Street Action (Historical Re-enactment) - Man Getting into Wagon
Adult Caucasian man climbs into wagon and grabs the reins; another wagon driver parked in BG as men ride horseback and wagons pass through street. Man climbing into empty wagon.
7th and 10th
1930s - Lincoln Memorial - Exterior of the Lincoln Memorial
Rear exterior of the Lincoln Memorial, traffic driving in FG.
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
Watergate Hearings - Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 22, 1973 - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord). Caucus Room, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington DC
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
[close-up of Senator Sam ERVIN at committee table] Before gaveling meeting to order, ERVIN jokes with a photographer, saying that "THERE IS AN ELUSIVE QUALITY ABOUT MY HANDSOMENESS WHICH NO PHOTOGRAPHER HAS YET CAUGHT", to general laughter in the room--[file under ERVIN, DIXIECRAT, HUMOR] [ERVIN bangs gavel one time] Senator Sam ERVIN. The committee -will come to order. Mr. Sam DASH. Senator Baker will be opening the questioning of Mr. McCord, but before that, Mr. McCord, it has come to our attention that there is concern among a number of Cuban-Americans and others of Latin nationalities that in your references in during your testimony, and I am not suggesting that it is your in intention to cast any aspersions, but that you have referred to others who participated with you by their proper names but in your reference, to those who are Cuban-Americans you have referred to them as Cubans. Would you in your testimony in the future when referring to the participants who worked with you, use their proper names and when not necessary not use a nationality or ethnic reference. Mr. James McCORD. I would be very glad to. Senator Howard BAKER. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. [cut to shot of BAKER, ERVIN, and DASH at center of table, then to close-up of BAKER alone] Mr. McCord and Mr. Fensterwald, I appreciate your agreeing on Friday to respond to rather general and even possibly ambiguous question. But to reiterate the questions, so it is in perspective for today's hearings, my purposes were these: I remarked that I thought that your testimony had been very thorough and very exact. We are grateful for the several memorandums that you provided the committee and from which you have testified which I believe adds to the element of concern and the element of sensitivity to exactitude which you've exhibited. I also express the concern that no notwithstanding very thorough interviews and one executive session with the committee, I continue to have the feeling that there is still a substantial amount of information which you may not think is relevant to this inquiry but which, in fact, may be relevant in terms of other witnesses, [cut to close-up of McCord, with serious expression, and counsel, with even more serious expression-- note general pattern of alternating shots of witness and interrogator] in terms of the general pattern which emerges. I indicated, therefore, that I would be grateful if you would search your mind and recollection within the boundaries and framework of the jurisdictional qualifications of this committee and within the scope of the general areas of inquiry which we have probed so far. As you probably know, the resolution, Senate Resolution 60, which was passed by the U.S. Senate, provides for an investigation into Presidential campaign activities in 1972, to ascertain whether or not there were illegal, improper, or unethical activities. Beyond that, Mr. McCord as you and Mr. Fensterwald can surmise this committee is interested in broad categories of interest. We want to know, of course, of illegal activity or activity which is now known to be illegal, such as the break-in at the Watergate, the Democratic National Committee. The so-called cover-up, the allegations that efforts were made by some to conceal the involvement or connections involved. The money that was involved in the campaign activities, the source, the accounting procedures involved, if any, and the disposition of those funds and for what, purpose. We want to know who is involved and what their relationships are. Those are the general areas that we have probed so far. My reason for reiterating it is to put, I hope, your further response into perspective and to add one additional caveat. Not only do I not know what I might ask you in these respects beyond what you have testified, but I do not want to limit you by a description that I have made of the contribution that you can make to this committee. I believe you to be a very, very important witness, and I reiterate this is not an adversary proceeding. You are not a defendant in this forum and I am not a prosecutor of a defender. So with that, Mr. McCord, if you have a further statement to make I would be grateful for it. That may or may not generate further questions that I will have as we proceed with the testimony. Mr. MCCORD. All right, sir. I will try to give as much information as I can. I realize the very large scope of the committee's activities. I realize that it is also possible that the committee may have an impression from me which I apologize for [WS of entire committee table] that I may have more information to offer than I really do. I think I will do my best to set forth in this memorandum today, this statement, things that have come to mind that it would appear you would be very interested in and to respond to questions therefrom and to do anything further that the committee may want to amplify what I have said or to develop any further information that may be helpful to you. Senator BAKER. Thank you sir.
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
Mr. McCORD. One statement that we did not get into on the last meeting I think primarily because of the factor of time, was a memorandum which I had written to the committee dated May 4, 1973, the subject of pressure on the defendants to blame the Watergate operation on CIA, and other matters. I'm prepared to go into that statement at this time if it has your approval. Senator BAKER. Thank you very much. Is that letter a part of the record? Mr. McCORD. No, sir. Senator BAKER. Do you have a copy of it? Mr. MCCORD. Yes, Sir. Senator BAKER. Might it be introduced, Mr. Chairman, as an exhibit? Senator ERVIN. Yes. Senator BAKER. I understand copies have not been supplied to the committee, but if there is no objection, I would like to ask it be made an exhibit in the record at this point. Senator ERVIN. I think it might be well to have it printed in full at this point in the body of the record, if there's no objection. Senator BAKER. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
Mr. MCCORD. I can read the statement if you like. I have previously referred to political pressure which was applied to the seven Watergate defendants. One area of pressure which was applied was that of December 1972, in which intense pressure was applied on some of the defendants to falsely claim for purposes of a defense during the trial in January 1973, that the Watergate operation was a CIA operation. This would have had the effect of clearing the Committee for the Re-Election of the President & the White House of responsibility for the operation. In two separate meetings in December 1972 it was suggested that I use as my defense during the trial the false story that the operation was a CIA operation. I refused to do so. I was subsequently informed by Bernard Barker just before the trial began in Jan 1973, that E. Howard Hunt and other unnamed persons in Miami had brought intense pressure to bear against the Cuban-Americans and by those-- I will digress from the record to read to whom I was referring-and the identities of these persons, came to me in conversations with Mr. Bernard Barker and some of the other individuals involved. Specifically I was referring to Mr. Bernard L. Barker, to Mr. Eugenio R. Martinez, to Mr. Frank A. Sturgis, to Mr. Virgilio R. Gonzales - I will restate the sentence, I was subsequently informed by Bernard Barker just before the trial began in January 1973, that E. Howard Hunt & other unnamed persons in Miami had brought intense pressure to bear against the Cuban-Americans who were defendants to use the same story that it was a CIA operation, as their defense, that my stand taken against it had been the decisive factor, according to Mr. Barker, causing this ploy to be dropped, that Hunt was very bitter about it. Mr. Hunt's bitterness was later revealed early in the trial when the same individuals advised that Hunt had said that "I was responsible for our being in the plight we were in, for not going along with the CIA thing."
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
Watergate Hearings - Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 22, 1973 - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord). McCord reading a statement vis a vis pressure on him to falsify his testimony at trial to deflect suspicion from the White House. Caucus Room, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington DC
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
[close-up of Jim McCORD and counsel] Mr. James McCORD. Alch went on to mention testimony, or a statement, made to Federal authorities by Gary Bittenbender, a Metropolitan Police Department undercover police officer, whom I had seen at the courthouse, on June 17, 1972, when the five of us who were arrested were arraigned, in which Bittenbender purportedly claimed that I had told him that day that the Watergate operation was a CIA operation. I advised Alch that if Bittenbender had made such a statement under oath that he had perjured himself, and that I had not made such a claim. Bittenbender can be interviewed to determine the circumstances under which he had made such a statement, and whether his statement was in fact an honest error of impressions based on events which occurred in court on that day, which could have misled him. Those were that some of us were identified in the hearing in court as formerly Connected with CIA. Alch went on to mention the name of Victor Marchetti whom he was considering calling to describe CIA training in which its employees were trained to deny CIA sponsorship of an operation if anything went wrong and its participants were arrested. He also requested that I meet with him in Boston on December 26, 1972, which I did. There he opened the discussion by showing me a written statement of an interview with Bittenbender, in which Bittenbender, claimed that on June 17, 1972, I had told him that the Watergate operation was a CIA operation. I repeated to Alch my earlier statement, that Bittenbender had either perjured himself, or had made a false statement to Federal authorities. I told Alch that I could not use as my defense the story that the operation was a CIA operation because it was not true. In addition, I told him that even if it meant my freedom, I would not turn on the organization that had employed me for 19 years, and wrongly deal such a damaging blow that it would take years for it to recover from it, [cut wide shot of committee table, with reporters in foreground) and finally that I believed the organization to be one of the finest organizations of its kind in the world and would not let anyone wrongly lay the operation at the feet of CIA. By now, I was completely convinced that the White House was behind the idea and ploy which had been presented, and that the White House was turning ruthless, in my opinion, and would do whatever was politically expedient at any one particular point in time to accomplish its own ends. In addition, I earlier had determined to tell the true story. of the Watergate operation, and it was now only a matter of a propitious time to do so.
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
James McCORD continues reading statement: On Fri, December 29, 1972, I visited Bernard Shankman's office in Washington, D.C., and let him read a statement which I had prepared, which I proposed to read to the press on Dec 30, 1972, releasing Alch as my attorney. I believed that although Shankman bad been present at the first meeting he was not a party to the events previously described. Shankman suggested that I give Alch an opportunity to meet with me and explain why he had undertaken the course which he had, and such a meeting was set up for Tues, January 2, 1973, in Washington. Alch failed to appear, and I delivered a letter to Judge Sirica, releasing Alch as my attorney. Alch immediately called, asked to meet with me on January 3, 1973, and asked to continue as my attorney. We met and Alch stated that he, in conveying the request made of me on Dec 21 & 26, 1972, was acting out of what be felt to be my own best interests. By this time, I was convinced that the ploy to lay the operation at CIA's doorstep had been headed off, and agreed to give him a second chance. By this time, I was also convinced that, the White House had fired Helms in order to put its own man in control at CIA, but as well to lay the foundation for claiming that the Watergate operation was a CIA operation, and now to be able to claim that "Helms had been fired for it." There had been indications as early as July that the Committee for the Re-Election of the President, was claiming that the Watergate operation was a CIA operation. Mrs. Hunt had told me in late, July 1972 that Paul O'Brien had told Howard Hunt in July that the Committee To Re-Elect the President had originally informed him that the Watergate operation was a CIA operation. Mrs. Hunt said that her husband had denied to O'Brien that it was a CIA operation. By early December 1972, it appeared that the White House, was beginning to make its move. The events of Dec 21 & Dec 26, 1972, only confirmed this in my mind. Further, based on an earlier discussion w/ Robert Mardian in May 1972, it appeared to me that the White House had for some time been trying to get political control over the CIA assessments & estimates, in order to make them conform to "White House policy." One of the things this meant to me was that this could mean that CIA estimates and assessments could then be forced to accord w/ DOD estimates of future U.S. weapons and hardware needs. This could be done by either shifting an intelligence function to DOD from CIA, or by gaining complete control over it at CIA.
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
James McCord continues reading statement: Among other things, this also smacked of the situation which Hitler's intelligence chiefs found themselves in, in the 1930's & 1940's when they were put in the position of having to tell him what they thought he wanted to hear about, foreign military capabilities and intentions, instead of what they really believed, which ultimately was one of the things which led to Nazi Germany's downfall.[file under "EERIE ALLUSIONS TO NAZI GERMANY"] When linked with what I saw happening to the FBI under Pat Gray-- political control by the White House, it appeared then that the two Government agencies which should be able to prepare their reports and to conduct their business, with complete integrity and honesty in the national interest, were no longer going to be able to do so. That the Nation was in serious trouble has since been confirmed in my opinion by what happened in the case of Gray's leadership of the FBI. E. Howard Hunt has additional information relevant to the above. Hunt stated to me on more than one occasion in the latter part of 1972, that he, Hunt had information in his possession which "would be sufficient to impeach the President.'' In addition, Mrs. E. Howard Hunt, on or about November 30, 1972, in a personal conversation with me, stated that E. Howard Hunt's attorney, William O. Bittman, had read to Kenneth Parkinson, the attorney for the Committee To Re-Elect the President, in which letter, Hunt purportedly threatened "to blow the White House out of the water." Mrs. Hunt at this point in her conversation with me, also repeated the statement which she, too, had made before, which was that E. Howard Hunt had information which could impeach the President. I regret that this memorandum has taken this length to set forth. In view of the nature of the information which I had to furnish, however, it appeared that there was no other way to adequately set this material forth, and to do so in the proper context, without deleting material highly relevant to the events being reported. I shall be glad to appear and answer questions under oath on the material which appears in this memorandum. It has my signature.
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
Watergate Hearings - Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 22, 1973 - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord). Continuing testimony of Jim McCORD vis a vis political pressure on him to participate in a COVERUP or be the FALL GUY for the scandal. Caucus Room, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington DC
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
Mr. James McCORD. Now, the above letter to Caulfield brings to mind another set of communications of mine on Dec 6, 1972. On Dec 4, 1972, Judge Sirica had stated in open court, that the jury in January 1973, would want to know who had hired the men for the Watergate operation & why. On December 6, 1972, the Washington Star carried an article which appeared to me to be an administration planted story answering Judge Sirica's query stating that "Reliable sources state that McCord recruited the four cubans and that they believed that they were working for the President on an extremely sensitive mission." This was untrue. This appeared to me to be laying the groundwork for a false claim at the trial that I was the "ringleader" of the Watergate plot. This would draw attention away from Hunt & Liddy, and I believe possibly away from the White House since both of them had formerly worked at the White House and I had not. That same evening, Dec 6, 1972, I sent telegrams to William 0. Bittman, attorney for Hunt, and Bernard Barker's residence in Miami, Fla., stating that the Star story was untrue as they both knew, and I asked for comments by return mail from Barker. I also wrote Hunt a letter on the matter stating that as he also knew, the story was untrue & he could either correct it, or I would do so. Copies of the telegrams can probably be obtained from the Western Union Co. With the letter to Caulfield in late Dec 1972, I was trying a to head off an effort to falsely lay the Watergate operation off on CIA. In the telegrams and letter to Hunt and the others in Dec 1972 that I have just referred to, I was trying to head off an effort to falsely lay the recruitment of the Cubans off on the writer which would in turn shift the focus of the trial off of those formerly connected with the White House, namely, Liddy and Hunt than from those who in effect had actually recruited them, namely Mr. Hunt. I have some other memorandum in the statements that I have here to read, and I can answer your questions at this point or proceed to the reading of the statement, as you would prefer. Senator Howard BAKER. If it's agreeable to the Chairman Mr. McCord, I'd prefer you go ahead and read the material that you have.